yugiohfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:ATEMVEGETA/Archive 5
For other messages see: Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5, Archive 6, Archive 7, Archive 8, Archive 9, Archive 10, Archive 11, Archive 12 Conditions again "Fusion Substitute Monsters" can be negated. But Tuner Substitutes like "Quickdraw Synchron" can't be negated (per its Rulings page). Do you know if it's just a special case (BKSS) since it's the only "Tuner Substitute Monster" with rulings? or if it's like that for every "Tuner Substitute Monster" (Vanadis of the Nordic Ascendant is probably the only other one, but has no rulings and is TCG only), in that case, it would need to be added to Condition Effects. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 05:21, April 28, 2011 (UTC) Mirror, Mirror, the beautiful that can destroy you... I have notice that couple users have tried to screw up the Ruling article into unofficial, no evidence rulings. I would like to ask you to keep the eye on it to see if it keep catch the virus from them again... This article would sure enough... --FredCa 21:02, May 6, 2011 (UTC) :No problem, that's a judge friend are for! I maybe novice, but I could like to keep them legal and official. --FredCa 10:44, May 7, 2011 (UTC) I rather ATEM or Falzar blah blah Check this article out and expect to shot the question down... --FredCa 22:05, May 7, 2011 (UTC) :I am not that much well aware of the rulings... I am only "Level 1 Judge", unlike rest of other you mentioned. Twice, Dest corrected the mistake I made so far. --FredCa 23:36, May 7, 2011 (UTC) :Take a look at Falzar's respond, he just corrected me again. So that's why I considered myself Level 1 Judge. I am sure you're Perfection Judge due to your expert knowledge of all those rules as well as Falzar. All other members that respond there are in between of you and I. --FredCa 00:46, May 8, 2011 (UTC) :Well, thanks for positive feedback. I will keep that in my mind. --FredCa 11:44, May 8, 2011 (UTC) Flip =/= Activate? As you could see in that forum that I was discussing with some user about "Phantom Hand" vs. "Dark Bribe". If you "revealing" the trap card from face-down to the face-up, is that consider as "Activate"? --FredCa 20:48, May 10, 2011 (UTC) :That's what I thought, that person who think Flip =/= Activate is wrong at all. Also I already proved him wrong with OCG rulings. --FredCa 21:23, May 10, 2011 (UTC) Prevent False Rulings Apparently there wasn't enough support for plan A. Want to take a look at plan B? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 07:47, May 11, 2011 (UTC) Lack of Picture Gallery As you have noticing that I earned some edit counts by create the loadcrap of missing Gallery. I don't get that they are become forgotten when ZEXAL arrived...? --FredCa 14:15, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :I can handle the create gallery just fine. But I am just wonder why they are not very action as it used to be before. Oh, on little note, you're right about little helps... I need to collect all various language of cards and shove them there too. --FredCa 14:34, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :I respect that. And I am sure that Cheesy-- I mean, Cheese would give me a hand for the various language card... As of one I tried to upload in Gallery was long dead, it's should be Japan version... --FredCa 15:34, May 11, 2011 (UTC) I just noticed that it's not ever create... Do you need any help get some information for it? --FredCa 15:42, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :Then explain why you put that kind of link on "Armed Dragon LV3" and crap like that, if you already have that kind of rulings, then put that link... Sorry that my head is on other side of the earth right now. --FredCa 21:41, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :As you noticed, I covered Armed Dragon LV3 for you. --FredCa 22:04, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :I don't deserve a thanks like this. I am already hearted by you a while ago, by consider me an important member of Judge. So in future, whatever you leave in the mess, I will try to cover it as much as possible. --FredCa 22:09, May 11, 2011 (UTC) Rulings Question: Should anything be done with Netrep rulings? Thanks. And as for the "Yu-Judges"? Do I list those as old? : On the topic of Yu-Judges being UDE rulings and are now unofficial, the ruling "If both "Spirit of the Six Samurai" and the equipped "Six Samurai" monster are destroyed by the same effect, the "Spirit of the Six Samurai's" effect is not applied." links to Yu-Judges. (I know about the email confirming it) but in WC11, Judgment Dragon only destroys the Union monster, not the equipped monsters. Is this a bug in WC11, or does the OCG want it that way? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 11:16, May 13, 2011 (UTC) Just to let you know... This article need to be update soon... I just found it with ban card ("Change of Heart") and no format arranging... So I just tried to fixing it and left it for you to finish it off. --FredCa 13:56, May 15, 2011 (UTC) :Ah, that's good, at least I eyed one for you to cover it up. --FredCa 20:43, May 15, 2011 (UTC) In the Name of Black... Some user deleted the bunch of rulings in "Black Tyranno" Ruling Article and mentioned that you shoved in "Black Rose Dragon" details in there. Was he wrong or am I doing it wrong? --FredCa 21:37, May 15, 2011 (UTC) :I saw that coming. So hope that user is happy now. --FredCa 22:01, May 15, 2011 (UTC) New article to cover up I think you missed one and should get it fixing? --FredCa 21:05, May 16, 2011 (UTC) :Previous Rulings? Are all those listed by Konami? --FredCa 21:16, May 16, 2011 (UTC) :All I need to believe is your "yes" or "no". No link necessary, but at least it would save some trouble for error rulings. --FredCa 21:24, May 16, 2011 (UTC) :Well, that's just little ridiculous if the first name is already at Navi box... --FredCa 22:10, May 16, 2011 (UTC) A Scrap Ruling just scrap on the article! I would like you to watch it over due to some idiot trying to shove up the unconfirmed rules there. --FredCa 00:00, May 20, 2011 (UTC) Annoy Bee in the Air... ...having try to screw up our rulings articles, he had done up to four articles by time I am going to report this to you. The latest was "Future Fusion" and "Pot of Duality", talk about activate those cards at same turn. Can you smacking him down and talk to him? --FredCa 17:33, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :Um, never mind the "smacking" part. He just came to me and admitted an apologize as well as promised to post the list in Talk Page from this point on. If you take a look in my talk page, you would know where he got all the information from. --FredCa 17:43, May 20, 2011 (UTC) Card Rulings:Brain Crusher Why do you want Card Rulings:Brain Crusher deleted? -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:14, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :I was gonna ask you the same question but i saw your answer. I still don't get the point, if you'll take care of it later, why delete it now? You can just add the note saying it's not official and leave it like this until the right time? Wilimut Talk Paris, 14:05, May 24, 2011 (UTC) ::I understand and you're doing a wonderful job. Please continue, it's very helpfull ;) Wilimut Talk Paris, 21:14, May 24, 2011 (UTC) Sorry to pecking your head... But I think someone need your help to make it clearly. It's about Celri, Monk of Dark World effect on itself. Does it second effect activate if he is selected by himself when he's discarded from the hand via "Card Destruction"? --FredCa 21:42, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :Ok, I just reminded the unregistered user to not celebratory it soon, since I also confirmed to be beginner judge. I only said that Celri work under the effect by OTHER "Dark World", not himself. So if you wish to counter-argument on me, then feel free go there and post your word. :Alright, I will take that quote you posted in my talk page to that article and tell them to hold the deal off till it's release. --FredCa 22:44, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :Done, just before you hit the publish. (Hahaha, pun...) --FredCa 22:47, May 20, 2011 (UTC) RE: RE: W Nebula + Solem Warning Ruling Q Hey again Atem, I was discussing W Nebula Meteorite with someone today, but anyway, I don't suppose you could give me a reference for this; "Today we received a Ruling Reversal for this situation. Konami now made Solemn Warning not be able to be chained to W Nebula Meteorite's activation."? Thanks, -Resk ✩ (Talk) 00:00, May 26, 2011 (UTC) RE: Spirit of the Six Samurai's Ruling I don't have a Cossy ID and don't plan on getting one, so I can't access the site. Thanks for keeping me updated. So they decided to contradict the OCG? and it says "activate", they should know that Continuous effects don't activate, it is really OK to use that term? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 06:52, May 26, 2011 (UTC) Equips and destroyed monsters I saw your post about it saying that it doesn't work for either of them, but I can't think of a reason on why the programming of WC11 says it won't activate with Double Tool C&D, but it will activate with Light Laser, when they should be programmed the same way if that theory holds true. The only difference I can see in the TCG lore is that D&C says "While equipped" whereas Light Laser does not, but it shouldn't really make a difference. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 00:34, May 27, 2011 (UTC) : Yes, exactly that. It's just that there isn't an explanation on why they (jp wiki & WC11) disagree and rule it like that. I guess it's possible that they don't group similar cards together and code them the same way, and instead they program each card separately, in that case, since the large time difference on when the 2 cards were released I guess it is possible for Light Laser to be outdated, and therefore wrong. And that the jp wiki are over dependent on video games. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 14:21, May 27, 2011 (UTC) Sniper? It seemed like you're very fast at the iron-sight and shoot down someone who tried to wrong the rulings... I could image you doing a duck hunting - only hunting on rulings screwer. --FredCa 11:09, May 27, 2011 (UTC) Shoot up the Mons... I mean of Spell/Trap Monster card... Does Compulsory Evacuation Device target monster that are treated as Spell Card (Crystal Beasts, stolen monster, Dragunity, Union) and shoot them to hand? --FredCa 23:48, May 27, 2011 (UTC) :Knew it, I answered the question as it only work on "Monster Card Zone" monsters... I told him that Monsters in Spell/Trap Card Zone are treated as Spell Cards like Equip or Continuous. What's a lucky guess I gave. --FredCa 09:43, May 28, 2011 (UTC) New Forum with Difficult Questions This one would like to get your answers. I had a difficult time judge the effect of Garoth when he was being under control by owner, then used Ryko's attack. You know what's going on by that forum. --FredCa 14:27, May 28, 2011 (UTC) :Never mind trying to answer, -dest- already swift it over his shoulder like if it's just a paper. I am swearing that he should renaming himself "-dest the swift judge-"... --FredCa 14:35, May 28, 2011 (UTC) New Troll in the Ruling Article This would like to be argument... --FredCa 21:48, May 28, 2011 (UTC) Arcanite Question Just let me get this straight, "Arcanite Magician's" ATK gained 2000 as soon as she is placed onto the field via Synchro Summon, right? If so, then she can be target by "Bottomless Trap Hole" almost instantly? --FredCa 20:18, May 29, 2011 (UTC) :Alright, I was just make sure so I can leave my List A ruling unchanged. If you wish to update it, feel welcome to do so. --FredCa 23:29, May 29, 2011 (UTC) W Nebula Meteorite vs. Solemn Warning/Oppression yet again Umm... for real? (If yes, Konami needs to make up their mind; seriously.) -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 13:52, May 31, 2011 (UTC) W Nebula Meteor Hello. To spare us the hassle of the rule with W Nebula Meteor, can you please tell me as to why you can somehow use Solemn Warning/Royal Oppression on the initial activation of W Nebula Meteor? Since no one can really see what the link shows to tell us "why" you supposedly can use those cards on Nebula? Please and thank you. Tea-Girl08 18:39, May 31, 2011 (EST) :Really? Since when have they been able to negate cards that have lingering effects? This has never been discussed before on any of the other forums/sites, it's not even one of the rules for them. I don't mean to sound rude, but I think you judges misunderstand some of the text of certain cards, like like the one judge who thought that rykos' milling effect was a cost and along with the other who said you can activate the effect of 2 Cyber Valley's to remove them both from play and draw 3 cards. :Besides, the effects of Nebula do not happen all at once (as mentioned in a legal rule), just like Infernity Launcher. So you cannot use Warning/Oppression upon Nebula's initial activation, or are you saying we can use Warning/Oppression upon Infernity Launcher's initial activation as well? :As for the Rulings of the Judge Program Forum, since no one but those registered can see the rules, those who aren't registered can't really believe what they are unable to see (common fact, even for real life). So since we can't "officially" see the ruling as to "why", everyone will have to assume with what they already know with the rules that they can find, and right now I'm finding "you cannot" rules. Tea-Girl08 21:40, June 01, 2011 (EST) ::Solemn Warning has never been able to negate cards with lingering effects like Last Will, Last Turn, etc... OR thanks to the effect of Warning, it would be able to negate any spell/trap that has the effect to special summon a monster(s) even if the spell/trap isn't special summoning upon it's initial activation. If (for example) Last Turn was able to be negated by Warning, then you can't play Last Turn while Jowgen the Spiritualist is on the field since (whoever played Last Turn) is attempting to summon a monster, but Jowgen says no one is able to special summon at all. It kind of ruins the whole combo with Jowgen/Last Turn if you can't even play Last Turn while Jowgen's on the field. Tea-Girl08 15:08, June 23, 2011 (EST) :::Actually, this doesn't end the confusion since those rules are OCG Rules and I play by the TCG Rules but this argument doesn't matter anymore. Tea-Girl08 9:00, July 18, 2011 (EST) WC11 acting weird : The opponent has 1 face-down Ryko and 1 Garoth. I take control of my opponent's Garoth using Mark of the Rose. Then I use Garoth to attack Ryko. : WC11 did this: ::: Chain Link 1: Ryko (Targets Mark of the Rose) :: resolve ::: Chain Link 1: Ryko (Destroys Mark of the Rose; mills, control is returned now) :: Garoth does not trigger because Ryko milled while Garoth was not on the same side of the field. : But in theory, shouldn't it be like this? ::: Chain Link 1: Ryko (Targets Mark of the Rose) :: resolve ::: Chain Link 1: Ryko (Destroys Mark of the Rose, control is returned instantly due to the Continuous-like properties or Equip Spells; mills afterwards since Ryko's effect does not occur simultaneously) ::new chain ::: Chain Link 1: Garoth (because Ryko milled while Garoth was on the same side of the field) : -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 12:49, June 9, 2011 (UTC) :: Alright, I look forward to seeing Konami's opinion on it. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 04:24, June 11, 2011 (UTC) ::: Any word from Konami yet? By the way, shouldn't it be 'Card Rulings:T.G. Monsters' (dot after G)? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 13:41, June 12, 2011 (UTC) :::: Ah, ok, so Konami likes to do things safely and only answer when they are absolutely sure of the answer. :::: NP. :::: One other thing, on Forum:Incorrect ruling of Fusion Recovery and Fusion Gate; shouldn't the monster forget that it was a Fusion Material after being moved? WC11 agrees with this and doesn't let me activate Fusion Recovery, after Fusing with Fusion Gate, then returning the monsters with Miracle Dig, while having a copy of Polymerisation in the Graveyard. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 14:08, June 12, 2011 (UTC) Polymer/Fusion/Merge I have noticed that "Fusion Gate" got a previous rulings that involved "Fusion Recovery", but "Fusion Recovery" does not getting a previous rulings... Just to remind you about that, so it could be fair. --FredCa 00:56, June 11, 2011 (UTC) RE:Welcome Back! Hi! It's nice to see you too! How are things? I'm not at 100% yet, but I'm definitely feeling better than I was a couple months ago! I'll probably not be on very much, but it's good to be back. --Deus Ex Machina ✉ 19:59, June 12, 2011 (UTC) :Ha, no one's been updating the OCG rulings? Man, it looks like I have a lot of work to do. :That UDE thing just sucks. Good luck with it. I'll help out whenever I can, if I get the chance. --Deus Ex Machina ✉ 20:47, June 12, 2011 (UTC) Error in your "HERO" list It's actually HERO'S Bond, not HERO's Bond. So you should get it fixing. --FredCa 10:08, June 16, 2011 (UTC) :No problem, after all, we are the member of Yu-Gi-Oh! Wiki! --FredCa 10:21, June 16, 2011 (UTC) Trigger effects in the Hand : I want to double check something before I add it. : It seems like Konami wants it so that only one Optional Trigger Effect per chain is allowed from the hand, so if you have multiple copies of "Gorz the Emissary of Darkness"/"Tragoedia"/"Battle Fader"/"Jurrac Herra‎"/"Wing Tortoise‎" in your hand, then you can only Special Summon one of them, you cannot Special Summon them all. The same applies to "Voltanis the Adjudicator"/"Van'Dalgyon the Dark Dragon Lord", and also "Watapon" (this one is not in the rulings, but was extracted from WC11, can you check this one please). : The only exception so far seems to be "Infernity Archfiend" (why does Infernity Archfiend work?). : -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 00:33, June 18, 2011 (UTC) :: Ok, Thanks. :: They really should stop making those BKSS exceptions... -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 06:14, June 18, 2011 (UTC)